North Dakota House Bill HB1019

North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session

Caption

AN ACT to provide an appropriation for defraying the expenses of the parks and recreation department; to create and enact a new section to chapter 55-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the creation and naming of state parks; to provide for a transfer; to provide for a report; and to provide an exemption.

Summary

House Bill 1019 is the Parks and Recreation Department appropriation bill for the 2025-27 biennium. It provides a total appropriation of about $62.1 million from all funds, including about $15.5 million from the general fund, to support department administration, parks operations and maintenance, recreation programs, and a new and vacant FTE pool. The bill also includes a separate appropriation for the International Peace Garden, with funding for projects there conditioned on matching support from Manitoba. A substantial share of the bill is dedicated to one-time capital and maintenance projects. These include deferred maintenance at state parks, comfort stations, technology upgrades, a sewer infrastructure project at Lake Metigoshe State Park, matching grants for parks, and several International Peace Garden projects such as a music camp revitalization, sewer/water/irrigation planning, and a cactus conservatory. The bill also allows certain unexpended prior appropriations to continue into the next biennium and authorizes additional federal or special funds that become available to be appropriated to the department. The bill also makes a policy change to state park governance by creating a new section in chapter 55-08 that prohibits a state agency or official from creating a new state park or renaming an existing one without prior approval from the Legislative Assembly. In addition, it directs a transfer of $122,000 from the Game and Fish operating fund for boat ramp maintenance at state parks and specifies how strategic investment and improvements fund dollars may be used, including the possibility of replacing buildings that are beyond feasible repair. The overall sentiment appears broadly supportive, as reflected in the strong bipartisan vote margins in both chambers. The House passed the bill 76-13 and the Senate passed it 34-12, indicating substantial approval but not unanimity. The vote totals suggest the bill was generally accepted as a necessary funding measure for parks infrastructure and operations, while still drawing some opposition. The main points of contention likely centered on the size and mix of appropriations, especially the use of one-time funds for capital projects, the continued funding of the International Peace Garden, and the new legislative approval requirement for creating or renaming state parks. The bill also includes large carryover appropriations from prior sessions, including funds tied to the Theodore Roosevelt presidential library and other major park-related projects, which may have contributed to concerns about long-term spending commitments and project prioritization.

Impact

HB1019 amends state spending law by appropriating funds to the Parks and Recreation Department and related projects for the 2025-27 biennium, while also authorizing specific transfers, reporting requirements, and continued use of certain unexpended prior appropriations. It affects the department’s operating budget, capital improvement funding, and project-specific grants, and it directs how strategic investment and improvements funds and other special funds may be spent. The bill also adds a new statutory restriction in chapter 55-08 requiring legislative approval before a new state park may be created or an existing state park renamed, thereby increasing legislative control over state park designation decisions.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been viewed favorably overall, with strong majorities in both the House and Senate supporting passage. The vote margins suggest broad agreement that parks operations, maintenance, and capital needs required funding, and that the International Peace Garden and other park projects merited continued investment. At the same time, the nontrivial number of negative votes indicates some reservations about the scope of spending and the policy provisions attached to the appropriation.

Contention

Likely areas of disagreement included the level of funding devoted to one-time capital projects versus ongoing operations, the use of strategic investment and improvements funds for multiple park projects, and the continued support for large or long-running projects such as the International Peace Garden and the Theodore Roosevelt presidential library-related funding. The new requirement that the Legislative Assembly approve any new state park or renaming of an existing park may also have been contentious because it limits executive or agency discretion. Opposition likely came from members concerned about spending levels, project selection, or the accumulation of carryover appropriations from prior sessions.